A service address isn't sufficient to, for example, easily piece together that one private owner has quietly purchased 70% of some town's resources, especially if they've done so via a collection of shells. And most legal actions against such abuse generally start grassroots; regulators aren't aware there's a problem until people complain.
Hiding information from the public makes it harder to notice abuse.
Flip the script: when an individual has incorporated and is enjoying the legal protections of being a corporate entity, why do they need their name hidden? What value in the society of granting them that privilege when they are enjoying legal protections and privileges not enjoyed by all members of society?
When an individual has registered a car and is enjoying the right to operate a 6000 lbs death machine on public roads, why do they need their name hidden? What value in the society of granting them that privilege when they are enjoying legal protections and privileges not enjoyed by all members of society?
The real question you have to answer is “Why is it necessary for company ownership to be public information?”
> A service address isn't sufficient to, for example, easily piece together that one private owner has quietly purchased 70% of some town's resources, especially if they've done so via a collection of shells
What’s wrong here? Even with a perfect UBO registry that private owner could just get together with a couple of their buddies and divvy up that 70%.
What legal action are you going to take? Owning 70% of a town’s resources is generally not against the law.
Given that corporate charter is a grant by the government acting on behalf of society at large, the question is not whether company ownership being public should be necessary, but whether it benefits society. There's no natural right to form legal entities distinct from one's person with no strings attached.
> When an individual has registered a car and is enjoying the right to operate a 6000 lbs death machine on public roads, why do they need their name hidden?
It's not. They carry a driver's license and law enforcement can reference their name by license plate.
Other users of the road do most of the enforcement. The police often get involved only at the behest of another user or if certain levels of misconduct are breached. It sounds like this transparency allows other citizens to do the low-level enforcement: organizing against an unwanted company buying that attempting to acquire more ownership your town might be analogous to honking, tailgating, etc.
What actual use do you have for this information? Beyond “it’s nice to know”?
Is it not sufficient that you have a service address for the legal entity in case you need to sue it?